The first thread didn’t. It had some very reasoned responses to his allegations, including one from a moderator on this board.
After that he started the abuse threads.
If he had gotten no response in either of the two abuse threads he would have created more of them until he got the reaction he wanted, which was his banning. I think that is a troll’s ultimate goal.
I think they would keep opening threads until
a) they get their response
b) they get banned
Both of these are what the troll is looking for.
Not true TwistofFate. This person started a bunch of threads at once. In the first thread people answered his question reasonably; he started posting insults; then people started making fun of him etc… which is feeding the troll.
If people had ignored him when he revealed his true colours, and stopped posting in the thread, and he continued, then you would have proved your point.
Also if a person starts trolling it will probably take more than 5 minutes of ignoring him before he quits. But if he starts 10 threads, all 10 are ignored, then he might quit.
Yes, Arnold, that’s what I already do. You’re preaching to the choir here…
The only proven way I know of on how to deal with trolls is that, whenever you see an obvious (or suspected) trolling maneuver, SIMPLY DON’T RESPOND. At all. In any way. You can’t win. Actually you can: Nothing drives them crazier than starvation. Trust me. Been there, done that. Watch them get more desperate for a response until eventually they self-destruct. You can virtually see the little cloud of smoke rise. Admittedly, it takes a little will power, but it works every time. 
I thought is was preaching to the converted. 
it was…
The concept we are searching for here is called “extinction” in behavior modification. Behavior has consequences. There is an informational channel in both directions, and one can modify the behavior of any subject by intelligently modifying ones own responses.
In the case of a behavior you want to have repeated more often, then it is most important that the response be very quick, and at least moderately reliable. That is called positive reinforcement. Even punishments immediately following behavior are positive reinforcement, because it is positive in schedule. The behavior happens, the response follows. In most cases, unless the punishment is severe, unavoidable, and distinctly undesirable to the original subject, positive schedule reinforcement is most effective in increasing the frequency of behavior.
Negative schedule reinforcement works like this. The stimulus is present at all times, until the behavior occurs, and it then stops, immediately, and reliably. Aversion stimuli are possible in a negative schedule program, and can be startlingly effective. It isn’t possible in our system, though, because a troll can avoid negative stimulus at will, simply by not reading the aversive sources. The negative schedule reward stimulus, in our case, is the existence of a large community of very intelligent and well-spoken people. The possibility of negative schedule reward is implicit in the function of the board, and looking at post counts of members will show you that that one is working just fine, thank you. We continue to post, and read, because the board provides us with our reward as long as we do so. When we log off, the reward stops. So, we log on again.
Then there is extinction. One must eliminate any cause effect between the stimulus and the behavior. That doesn’t mean you ignore anyone you think is a troll. It doesn’t mean you refuse to answer any question because it might be a troll. It means you don’t change your behavior because of the behavior of the other poster. If you find the question, or point useful, or interesting, you reply to the point. If you find it trivial, or stupid, you move on to something else. If it is a troll, you don’t change that. You don’t get into a fight, unless what you want to do is encourage fights. You don’t tell them that they are trolls or anything at all, unless you want to encourage trolls. If you answer an inflammatory question with a factual and rational reply, that is not changing your behavior and still falls into the definition of extinction. (Well, this assumes that factual and rational replies are usual for you.)
No one really just posts to post, without any thought of the reply. And certainly no one posts repeatedly to a forum that they don’t find some response from. The absence of stimulus cannot cause an increase in behavior, unless the stimulus itself is present under natural situations. In that case, removal of the stimulus is a response. No response at all causes extinction of behavior. (Remember, in this analysis, a response is any change in behavior by the general membership of the board.) Now, the phenomenon of the drive by troll is not going to go away. But, repeat visits will go down if the trolls find that nothing they do changes us at all.
So, answer the post, even if the poster is a troll, if, and only if, the post itself is something you wish to see repeated. (And that doesn’t mean answer only posts you agree with, unless you want a message board of clones who all agree with you.) If the post is one you think the board would be better without, then don’t reply. If the thread has other posts you find worth your time and effort, simply answer those posts, and continue your discussion. When posters you admire are posting less, or more than usual, post your approval of their posts, and they will likely post more often, in either of the cases. If you don’t admire the poster, then don’t post about them at all. Use the board’s ignore function, if your own ignore function is not operating correctly.
It works. Now some trolls are pretty stupid. But this method works on lab rats, invertebrates, and even graduate students.
“The road to truth is long, and lined the entire way with annoying bastards.” ~ Alexander Jablokov ~
Other than this Pit thread, could we at least have a very visible explanation of what to do with trolls, so that we don’t feel the need to post “DNFTT”? I know I’m guilty of this, but don’t feel it’s as futile as Kevin Bacon screaming “All is well!” in Animal House. Possibly a mod closing a troll’s thread and mentioning that feeding him was not the best possible idea? Even a sticky would help, I would think.
Seems like Arnold answered that.
Tris
The best advice I’ve seen so far. Since you are a professional in behavior dynamics, it is no wonder that your analysis is so excellent. Thanks.
WE, whose post are you addressing? Because while I realize that Arnold told us here what to do with trolls, I’m asking for a visible explanation. A small post in the middle of a Pit thread isn’t real visible.
If you weren’t addressing me, then please ignore the above.
Gotcha munch, my mistake. A sticky would be nice.
I put it in the FAQ - guidelines for posting thread in ATMB.
Posters, if you see someone feeding a troll, I would be appreciative if you would remind that person that the ATMB FAQ discourages such a practice.
Damn! It was even more fun than feeding my goldfish.
Now the only lingering question is whether this will have any effect on those mysterious troll feeding posters.
Triskadecamus, that was a very good post. Thank you for writing it.
I would assume e-mail would be the desired form of communication for this?
Gotcha ya! No problem, Arnold. You rock!
The “Report this Post” function works beautifully. I found a returning banned poster and used it.
About half an hour later, I saw Euty on AIM and messaged him with “[psycho’s name deleted] is back as [new name deleted]”
He responded with “I know, Coldfire said you reported the post.” I also emailed Lynn and Tuba. Lynn banned the sock within a few hours.
I know it’s tempting to feed the little weasels. God knows I’ve done it myself. It’s a lot more efficient and ninja like to ignore them and report them.
Two additional thoughts.
By responding to a really bad troll – a guy who obviously has about a half-hour half-life, or shorter if there’s a mod or admin online, you make it awkward if we decide to make the post disappear. Sometimes we’ll leave a trollish post so as not to make the respondants look foolish, sometimes we won’t. Either way, it’s an unhappy solution for everyone.
The little messages some of you guys put in the “report this post” message field are priceless! I love 'em, and like 'em, and want to read more.
So another vote for “responding” with the little link on the bottom right of the post.